RE: Jaguar XE V6 S: UK Review
Discussion
I really do like the XE (and the new XF too), but I can't help but think that, despite how good they are meant to drive, they are behind the Germans in a number of ways. Just off the top of my head:
Why no AWD on the more powerful models?
Why no estates?
The engines. Surely pretty much all of them (except for the Ingenium diesel) are past their best? How much more does the supercharged V8 have left to give? It's currently at 575bhp.
Why are the Ingenium diesel-powered cars seemingly slightly behind their competitors on performance?
Why are certain technologies not available or not as good as they could be? Here I'm thinking of no LED headlamp option with the XE, infotainment systems that are generally regarded as average at best and no mention at all of autonomous features. Just look at the new Mercedes E-Class or Volvo S90 / V90 and all of the technology they contain compared with the XF, for instance.
Maybe they just need a facelift to sort out most of these bits, but at the moment they do seem to still be behind in certain areas. I really, really hope they can become leaders in every area and not just in the finer details of ride and handling as I'd love to buy a Jaguar.
Why no AWD on the more powerful models?
Why no estates?
The engines. Surely pretty much all of them (except for the Ingenium diesel) are past their best? How much more does the supercharged V8 have left to give? It's currently at 575bhp.
Why are the Ingenium diesel-powered cars seemingly slightly behind their competitors on performance?
Why are certain technologies not available or not as good as they could be? Here I'm thinking of no LED headlamp option with the XE, infotainment systems that are generally regarded as average at best and no mention at all of autonomous features. Just look at the new Mercedes E-Class or Volvo S90 / V90 and all of the technology they contain compared with the XF, for instance.
Maybe they just need a facelift to sort out most of these bits, but at the moment they do seem to still be behind in certain areas. I really, really hope they can become leaders in every area and not just in the finer details of ride and handling as I'd love to buy a Jaguar.
kambites said:
SidewaysSi said:
Does it matter when the Jaguar is the better driver's car?
To the majority of buyers/renters, it apparently does. This is why the Germans have all gone turbocharged. SidewaysSi said:
Audidodat said:
FWIW I'd rather have a comfy car for A to B duties and a drivers car for driving duties.
What modern car in this class is not "comfy"? The fact the XE will destroy an A4 as a driver's car easily swings it for me. And I would argue the Jag is the more comfortable of the two as well. 
williamp said:
The A4 has "quality plastics" which the leather and natural materials of a jaguar cannot possibl match
All the repmibiles s are comfy. That's what they're really bought for. You don't mind your driving car being less comfy, because it's all about the drive, unlike the bloaty BMW/AUDI/JAG.David87 said:
I really do like the XE (and the new XF too), but I can't help but think that, despite how good they are meant to drive, they are behind the Germans in a number of ways. Just off the top of my head:
Why no AWD on the more powerful models?
Why no estates?
The engines. Surely pretty much all of them (except for the Ingenium diesel) are past their best? How much more does the supercharged V8 have left to give? It's currently at 575bhp.
Why are the Ingenium diesel-powered cars seemingly slightly behind their competitors on performance?
Why are certain technologies not available or not as good as they could be? Here I'm thinking of no LED headlamp option with the XE, infotainment systems that are generally regarded as average at best and no mention at all of autonomous features. Just look at the new Mercedes E-Class or Volvo S90 / V90 and all of the technology they contain compared with the XF, for instance.
Maybe they just need a facelift to sort out most of these bits, but at the moment they do seem to still be behind in certain areas. I really, really hope they can become leaders in every area and not just in the finer details of ride and handling as I'd love to buy a Jaguar.
At the end of the day Jaguar are still a relative minnow size wise in comparison to the big 3 Germans, they've come a long way with TATA investment but there's only so much they can do at once. AWD is starting to come through now and estates will no doubt follow in due course...Why no AWD on the more powerful models?
Why no estates?
The engines. Surely pretty much all of them (except for the Ingenium diesel) are past their best? How much more does the supercharged V8 have left to give? It's currently at 575bhp.
Why are the Ingenium diesel-powered cars seemingly slightly behind their competitors on performance?
Why are certain technologies not available or not as good as they could be? Here I'm thinking of no LED headlamp option with the XE, infotainment systems that are generally regarded as average at best and no mention at all of autonomous features. Just look at the new Mercedes E-Class or Volvo S90 / V90 and all of the technology they contain compared with the XF, for instance.
Maybe they just need a facelift to sort out most of these bits, but at the moment they do seem to still be behind in certain areas. I really, really hope they can become leaders in every area and not just in the finer details of ride and handling as I'd love to buy a Jaguar.
I would point out however that the XE is to my knowledge the only car in its class with 'remote start' and cabin pre-warm/cool as standard, nobody seems to mention this?. This useful tech feature doesn't even seem to be available as an option on the Germans?
The XE also has AEB as standard which recently enabled it to achieve 5 stars with NCAP and the award for safest car in its class. The manual 163ps was also the first exec saloon diesel to achieve sub 99 co2 emissions - if you are interested in that sort of thing?
It's the only car in its class with wishbone front suspension, torque vectoring as standard etc.. which shows the focus is more on ride and handling rather than tech and plastics -perhaps wrongly given a lot of the comments on here?
As far as the infotainment goes it does everything I need it to i.e. bluetooth music streaming, ipod connectivity including apps, DAB, decent 3d colour sat nav with full postcode entry (voice activated too). For those really into tech they have just launched a new 'pro' system which I have seen demonstrated on F-pace which at least matches the Germans top nav options (most of which are expensive optional extras anyway)
I thought this thread was a review of V6 Jaguar. Therefore, what is the competition? top line BMW 340i, Audi S4, Merc?
At this range reps don't buy this model, this car is for enthusiast and I doubt if there is much in it between them. Why can't we simply talk about the merits of the car in this class and not things like 'if only there was a diesel version' or 'it should have better mpg'. This is Jaguar's top of the line vehicle, it won't be a diesel, it is unlikely to be very fuel efficient. However, it will be very fast, sounds good (presumably), handles better than the standard car etc.
At this range reps don't buy this model, this car is for enthusiast and I doubt if there is much in it between them. Why can't we simply talk about the merits of the car in this class and not things like 'if only there was a diesel version' or 'it should have better mpg'. This is Jaguar's top of the line vehicle, it won't be a diesel, it is unlikely to be very fuel efficient. However, it will be very fast, sounds good (presumably), handles better than the standard car etc.
Selmer Mk6 said:
I thought this thread was a review of V6 Jaguar. Therefore, what is the competition? top line BMW 340i, Audi S4, Merc?
At this range reps don't buy this model, this car is for enthusiast and I doubt if there is much in it between them. Why can't we simply talk about the merits of the car in this class and not things like 'if only there was a diesel version' or 'it should have better mpg'. This is Jaguar's top of the line vehicle, it won't be a diesel, it is unlikely to be very fuel efficient. However, it will be very fast, sounds good (presumably), handles better than the standard car etc.
Bang on, and my old man wouldn't have considered any of the three you name. The XE was a shoo in.At this range reps don't buy this model, this car is for enthusiast and I doubt if there is much in it between them. Why can't we simply talk about the merits of the car in this class and not things like 'if only there was a diesel version' or 'it should have better mpg'. This is Jaguar's top of the line vehicle, it won't be a diesel, it is unlikely to be very fuel efficient. However, it will be very fast, sounds good (presumably), handles better than the standard car etc.
Selmer Mk6 said:
I thought this thread was a review of V6 Jaguar. Therefore, what is the competition? top line BMW 340i, Audi S4, Merc?
At this range reps don't buy this model, this car is for enthusiast and I doubt if there is much in it between them. Why can't we simply talk about the merits of the car in this class and not things like 'if only there was a diesel version' or 'it should have better mpg'. This is Jaguar's top of the line vehicle, it won't be a diesel, it is unlikely to be very fuel efficient. However, it will be very fast, sounds good (presumably), handles better than the standard car etc.
To me, this is probably the best post to respond to.At this range reps don't buy this model, this car is for enthusiast and I doubt if there is much in it between them. Why can't we simply talk about the merits of the car in this class and not things like 'if only there was a diesel version' or 'it should have better mpg'. This is Jaguar's top of the line vehicle, it won't be a diesel, it is unlikely to be very fuel efficient. However, it will be very fast, sounds good (presumably), handles better than the standard car etc.
The issue I see, is that yes, its right to compare it to the others you mentioned. But also, to add a few more points. No-one really buys these cars at rock bottom entry prices, unless its a fleet purchase. Most cars come optioned. As such, the "as tested" figure becomes important. In this space, you get the view that this particular car is very expensive to get it on road.
Another point to raise, is a bit like when you look at 911s. There are so many variants within the 911 range, and then you also look at things like boxsters and caymans. Is it better to buy a fully optioned cayman or a bog stock 911? This becomes a similar discussion to this car. Which Jag would you choose to spend the better part of an optioned up $55k on?
To me, I don't personally like this car. FOr the simple reason that its a lot of money (eg $55k), for a car that doesn't move the goalposts on much at all. Someone else talked about the below-par tech (which admittedly was responded to, but to me with tech I have no interest in - remote start and prewarmed interiors are a gimmick I have no interest in). Of more interest to me is the performance of the car, and this is where it falls down to cars that are 7 years older, as I mentioned previously.
7 years in design terms is a generation. To be a generation behind, with a brand new car, is a disgraceful outcome.
big_rob_sydney said:
Of more interest to me is the performance of the car, and this is where it falls down to cars that are 7 years older, as I mentioned previously.
7 years in design terms is a generation. To be a generation behind, with a brand new car, is a disgraceful outcome.
It's not 7 years behind, if you care about such frippery the 0-60 dash is less than 5s so it's hardly slow and is likely to give quite reasonable in gear times. It's got more power than the 340i and the S4 and it handles better than both of them. As has already been said, only a fool would gauge a whole car by it's 0-60mph time.7 years in design terms is a generation. To be a generation behind, with a brand new car, is a disgraceful outcome.
A supercharger will always be less efficient than a turbo but it doesn't appear to affect the XE very much. The engine is also proven from the f-type so it is a couple of years old but then so is the BMW straight 6 and the Audi V6 in the S4 (with supercharger) so it's hardly 7 years.
It is expensive but only when viewed against the massive discounts BMW are giving on petrol cars right now - you can get £10k off a 340i from Coast to Coast cars in the UK. Big discounts don't bode well for long term residuals and BMW have pretty much flooded the market with 3 series, so the XE is likely to offer significantly better residuals than the 3-series and certainly the current generation S4.
williamp said:
SidewaysSi said:
Audidodat said:
FWIW I'd rather have a comfy car for A to B duties and a drivers car for driving duties.
What modern car in this class is not "comfy"? The fact the XE will destroy an A4 as a driver's car easily swings it for me. And I would argue the Jag is the more comfortable of the two as well. Not sure why people are complaining about performance stats. The XE does 0-100 in 11.5 secs [1], on par with a current 340i and faster than the outgoing S4. Pretty good result for something RWD, no?
Not that this really matters IMO -- good thing the power escalation seems to have slowed down a bit. The "Sub-M" compact saloons all seem to stay around 300-350 PS. Easily sufficient. And I think Jag are doing it right, focus on the bits that make it enjoyable to drive while delivering comparable performance stats.
If there is anything to criticize, for me it is the styling which is a bit too generic. And the street price with current discounts seems to be 10% higher than a BMW. Pretty sure the S4 will be more expensive though. But thinking residuals will be strong for the Jag is certainly optimistic. I'm pretty sure in Europe that won't be the case. Hence very few people will rent a V6S.
[1] http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2017-jaguar-xe...
Not that this really matters IMO -- good thing the power escalation seems to have slowed down a bit. The "Sub-M" compact saloons all seem to stay around 300-350 PS. Easily sufficient. And I think Jag are doing it right, focus on the bits that make it enjoyable to drive while delivering comparable performance stats.
If there is anything to criticize, for me it is the styling which is a bit too generic. And the street price with current discounts seems to be 10% higher than a BMW. Pretty sure the S4 will be more expensive though. But thinking residuals will be strong for the Jag is certainly optimistic. I'm pretty sure in Europe that won't be the case. Hence very few people will rent a V6S.
[1] http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2017-jaguar-xe...
charlie7777 said:
There are a lot of people who now would not like to be seen in a German car. What with the thrusting bully image and emissions cheating scandal.
I'm not sure that's true. They're more likely to want something different because the BMW/Merc/Audi mid range saloons are all so tedius. There's no flair or style in any of them and the 5/E/A6 area is even worse. VAG are no better. Volvo have only just got their act in gear with the S90 and V90 but apart from that it's Jaguar and they have this time done a great job I think. Dreary mpg figures? All mpg figures are dreary. If you expect to take any pleasure from a made up fuel economy figure, a petrol V6 is never going to be for you, so move on and get your thrills from saving £10 a week on fuel with some horrendous 4 cyl diesel.
I really cannot get my head around spending all that money on chassis and suspension design and components and then making the car auto only. Completely writes it off as a car for driving pleasure. A manual 3er will inevitably be better to drive.
I really cannot get my head around spending all that money on chassis and suspension design and components and then making the car auto only. Completely writes it off as a car for driving pleasure. A manual 3er will inevitably be better to drive.
The good thing about sticking with superchargers and not quite being up there with CO2 figures is the good throttle response which the turbocharged ones aren't trying to match.
That's something that is a subtle benefit to driving pleasure and not something that can be given a simple sound-bite like a peak BHP top trumps figure. The sub-M BMWs are hobbled a bit (for my driving style at least) by excessively slow throttle response. Speaking personally, I find it hard to derive much enjoyment from a well balanced RWD chassis with a slow throttle.
That's something that is a subtle benefit to driving pleasure and not something that can be given a simple sound-bite like a peak BHP top trumps figure. The sub-M BMWs are hobbled a bit (for my driving style at least) by excessively slow throttle response. Speaking personally, I find it hard to derive much enjoyment from a well balanced RWD chassis with a slow throttle.
BMW drive by wire throttle is pretty terrible. It makes the petrol cars feel more like diesels, which probably suits BMW just fine as they don't actually want to sell petrol cars.
I think it is more the throttle mapping than the turbos, but they obviously also play a part in putting more mush between throttle inputs and engine response. If a lot of it is mapping (for imaginary economy gains), it could presumably be fixed by an aftermarket outfit that know what they are doing.
A mushy throttle also makes a manual car closer to an auto in terms of driving pleasure and engagement. Again, though, no big manufacturer wants to sell you a manual car, so they won't care.
It wouldn't be that difficult to make the XE better to drive than a 3 series, to be honest, and the C-class is streets behind the BMW, with the Audi even worse than that! Being the best of a fairly bad bunch seems to be the Jag's aim, and a slusher automatic won't stop it going that (as far as journos are concerned, as very few of them are actually driving enthusiasts so much as car enthusiasts).
I think it is more the throttle mapping than the turbos, but they obviously also play a part in putting more mush between throttle inputs and engine response. If a lot of it is mapping (for imaginary economy gains), it could presumably be fixed by an aftermarket outfit that know what they are doing.
A mushy throttle also makes a manual car closer to an auto in terms of driving pleasure and engagement. Again, though, no big manufacturer wants to sell you a manual car, so they won't care.
It wouldn't be that difficult to make the XE better to drive than a 3 series, to be honest, and the C-class is streets behind the BMW, with the Audi even worse than that! Being the best of a fairly bad bunch seems to be the Jag's aim, and a slusher automatic won't stop it going that (as far as journos are concerned, as very few of them are actually driving enthusiasts so much as car enthusiasts).
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff